Gary Gygax wrote his DMG in ordinary English.Gary Gygax is no longer with us so we will never ever know exactly what he meant in those earlier editions with regards to HP.
When he says that "damage scored to characters . . . is actually not substantially physical . . . until the last handful of hit points are considered" (p 61), that "damage is not actually sustained - at least in proportion to the number of hit points marked off in most cases" (p 81), that "hit points are not actually a measure of physicl ldamage, by and large, as far as characters . . . are concerned" (p 61), he is not speaking ambiguously. He is saying, as plain as day, that hit points are not substantially physical!
This is also the reason he gives for the absence of a hit location system (p 61):
[H]it points are not actually a measure of physical damage, by and large . . . Therefore the location of hits and the type of damage caused are not germane to them."
How much clearer do you want him to have been?
No. I've just shown that Gygax also uses that reason to explain why no hit location system is needed - because serious injuries aren't actually being suffered.In order to rationalise the high hit points of high level characters, they started to attribute it to ideas of fatigue, winded, luck, morale, etc. That's the sole reason
In 4e, the latent capabiities of the approach are further developed, via inspirational healing, a much more straightforward approach to recovery times that is easy to house rule depending on desired pacing (and the 5e DMG actually spells this out), etc.
Yout don't need a rate. That is the point of flexible hit points (which [MENTION=82779]MechaPilot[/MENTION] and others have emphasised in this thread). You can narrate them as is appropriate to the particular situation.some of you have been banging on about 4th edition and how it supposedly better represented HP. Well I'm afraid it is actually the worst edition to handle HP and I will tell you why.
1st: Let's look at what the PHB says about Hit Points.
Over the course of a battle, you take damage from attacks. Hit points (hp) measure your ability to stand up to punishment, turn deadly strikes into glancing blows, and stay on your feet throughout a battle. Hit points represent more than physical endurance. They represent your character’s skill, luck, and resolve—all the factors that combine to help you stay alive in a combat situation.
Hmmmm looks to me like we have a bit of vague wording here when it says "Hit points represent more than just physical endurance". As you can see there is no ratio here as to what the physical part is and what the rest is.
This point also applies in response to the following:
You narrate as is required.Problem is, to get poison that causes fatigue etc needs to prick the skin which equates to meat.
<snip>
If an attack hits, there are other repercussions (e.g. poison, paralysis, drain, etc) yet if this attack that hits isn't meat, how do we account for these side-effects?
Remember, in the typical case no grown adult is going to die, or even be seriously impeded, from the mere physical injury of a snake or spider bite. So it's not as if you need to deduct some amount of "meat points" to reflect the puncture wound. So whether the snake's bite hits or misses shouldn't matter to hit points on a "meat" approach.
Likewis a ghoul's scratch or a spectre's touch. There is no requirement to deduct "meat" points to reflect the fact that, as the character tries to dodge or block the undead manages to touch him/her on the face, or slash its claws across an exposed piece of skin, thereby draining the level or paralysing the hapless victim.
Where does it say this?Healing Surges: Well the book doesn't actually tell you in game what they represent but they allow you to heal injuries
Heaing surges, when unlocked and spent, allow you to regain hit points. The three most common ways that healing surges are unlocked is (i) by taking a short rest, (ii) by being inspired by rousing words or divine invocation (Inspiring Word, Healing Word, Majestic Word, Word of Vigour, etc), (iii) by getting one's second wind.
The correct inference to draw is that regaining hit points isn't about healing injuries at all, but rather about refocusing, resurgence, getting one's breath, bucking up.
Again, what this tells us is that unconsciousness does not mean "in a coma due to blood loss and trauma". It is quite different, in this respect, from negative hit points in 1st ed AD&D, which incapacitate for a week (unless a heal spell is used) and which - if they drop to -6 or below - licence the GM to narrate "scarring or the loss of some member, if you so choose" (DMG p 82).the fact that you can go from negatives and unconscious to back to full health by using them.
Only if a character actually dies does it turn out that the hit point loss also corresponded to a fatal injury. Hence the need for somewhat oblique narration - much as Tolkien uses to describe Frodo's injury in Moria.
A bit like Luke in the tree on Dagobah, the only inconsistencies are those you are brining with you.There is no point in actually having armour if we look at other mechanics such as damage on a miss.
<snip>
See how the inconsistencies start to emerge?
<snip>
when you start adding in the narrative and description of the mechanics it becomes an absolute mess of inconsistencies.
Armour in 4e is mostly a class feature that determines access to magic item types - ACs tend to be relatively similar for all characters (moreso than other defences, which can show quite wide variation - upto +/-8 or 9 for the 28th level PCs in my 4e game, compared to +/-4 for AC).
Damage on a miss is amost always less than damage on a hit (typically one-half), and hence being missed is as worthwhile as saving vs a fireball in AD&D (ie worthwhile). Typically, also, being missed reduces or negates the adverse conditions that a hit woud otherwise impose.
Different damage for different weapons: What's the point in this if weapons aren't really actually hitting anyone?[/qoute]It's contributes colour to the game: heavier weapons wear opponents down more effectively.
In 4e, it also introduces a mechanical system into the game: typically, for most characters, the meaningful choice is between a weapon that is +2 to hit and does dX damage, or a weapon that is +3 to hit but does d(X-2) damage.
Presumably for the same reason that, when you dodge the breath weapon of an ancient dragon you take more damage than when you dodge the breath weapon of a young dragon: the attack is fiercer, and so the dodging sets you back more.Why would a "hit" but described as not really making contact but making the person winded from a greatsword cause more damage than a dagger if neither weapon is actually hitting?
There are two responses to this.Using strength to do more damage: Again, what is the point in this? Strength has to do with physical power and if most HP is not meat then this is pointless and makes no sense.
First, the stronger a blow, the harder it is to block.
Second, many melee attacks in 4e are not made using STR. Many clerics, and avengers, use WIS. Thieves, monks and some raners use DEX. Many paladins and some arcane casters use CHA. Etc. In 4e, the different attack stats are part of class flavour, and they reflect the capacity of the attacking character to force his/her will upon an enemy.
Powers are abilities that players use, when playing their PCs, to attack NPCs and monsters. They don't tell us much about what a PC's hit points mean.Let's look at a few powers
You will have noted in my quotes from Gygax that he distinguishes characters and creatures. 4e does the same, but extends the distinction to PCs and NPCs. NPCs don't typically have more than 1 or 2 healing surges, and typically have no way to unlock them outside of a short rest (eg they don't have second wind or other in-combat healing abiliites). The GM can narrate hit point loss to an NPC or monster however s/he likes. But if s/he narrates, say, a hand being cut off, Healing Word is not going to stick it back on! You would need at least Remove Affliction (an 8th level ritual) for that.
As long as you remember that, for a PC, the only time that hit point loss means serious injury is when s/he dies, or otherwise suffers some lingering condition that can't be got rid of via surge expenditure, you won't have any trouble narrating 4e.
Perhaps. I am talking only about 1st ed AD&D - which I have quoted extensively - and 4e, which in my view takes that AD&D system and builds on its strength while eliminating its wonky elements (non-proportional healing being the main one).There's a huge difference between the bulk of hit points (as a collective) being metaphysical, and the top X% being metaphysical while the last one is always pure meat. Saying that someone can be at half, and yet barely show any signs of injury, requires substantial interpretation to which many others may not agree. It was codified in 4E that above-half is purely meta-physical and below-half was nicks and scratches, but that was not the case in 2E or 3E.
Not at all.Exercising this option in 4E required altering every instance of non-magical healing, down to the healing surge. It is no trivial task. It is significantly easier in 5E.
If you want to play hit points as meat, I assume that you will not be using warlords. You can also ban the fighter powers that permit self-healing if you want. (Alternatively, you can treat them as monk-like training, ki power etc). As I have posited, you will be increasing the resting times, so a short rest will not take 5 minutes. Hence, the only other bit of non-magical healing left is the second wind, which is a single surge, and hence (in the absence of magic items or special abilities) is 25% of hit points once between short rests. And therefore no threat to hit points as meat.
It's easy as pie. You just have to set your healing times - I would suggest 8 hours for a short rest, but you might prefer 24, and then 1 week for an extended rest, though you might prefer 1 month.
Generally, when a character like Boromir has been shot six times and keeps coming, s/he collapses at the end. I prefer for this sort of thing to be handled via a "frenzy"-type mechanic, or perhaps damage reduction.In real life, perhaps, but that's not the fictional world in which these stories take place. A fictional warrior might be shot six times, and keep coming at you, while someone else will get shot once and go down.
<snip>
To put it another way, there's nothing inconsistent with the view that those metaphysical parts of your HP total are the things that allow someone to survive a wound that would have killed someone else.
I prefer gameplay that upholds verisimilitude. Hence for heroic action, I like hit points. For grit, I prefer a system that actually delivers gritty results, like RQ, HARP or Burning Wheel.that speaks only of your own perspective, and your own inability to compromise verisimilitude in the name of gameplay. No model is perfect